About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
officer with occasional stints in the pentagon. in 1997, judge grimm was elected a magistrate judge by the judges of the u.s. district court for the district of maryland and in 2006 became the chief u.s. magistrate judge in baltimore. in 2009, chief justice john roberts appointed judge grimm to serve as a member of the advisory committee for the federal rules of civil procedure, and in 2010, he was designated as chair of the civil rules committee discovery subcommittee. i mention that because it's evident from the chief judge's appointment that judge grimm is a nationally recognized expert on cutting edge issues of law and technology. he has written numerous authoritative opinions, books and articles on the subject of evidence, civil procedure and trial advocacy. he also continues to inspire the next generation of lawyers by teaching classes at both of our law schools, and on several occasions, professor grimm has been awarded the title of outstanding magistrate faculty member. that's as a magistrate judge, he has been able to find time not only to teach but to be an outstanding pro
. from 1980 until this year when a lame duck session followed a presidential election, every single judicial nominee reported with bipartisan judicial committee support has been confirmed. that's whether it was a republican or democratic president or republican-controlled or democratic-controlled senate. according to the nonpartisan congressional research service, no consensus nominee reported prior to the august recess has ever been denied a vote before now. somehow this president is treated differently than all the other presidents before it. it had been here with president ford, president carter, president reagan, first president bush, president clinton, second president bush, now president obama. none of those other presidents were treated in the way this president is treated. it's something senate democrats have never done in a lame duck session, whether after a presidential or midterm election. in fact, the senate democrats allowed votes on 20 of president george w. bush's judicial nominees, including three circuit court nominees in the lame duck session after the election in
believe that's the message of this election, that people want us to sit down and be reasonable and work together. they also sent a message through the reelection of our president, who campaigned, saying that the wealthiest among us should be part of solving the problem, can afford to pay a little bit more in order to make sure we're not asking middle-class families to have the entire burden of resolving the deficit in our country. the president won, the public said common sense says everybody ought to be participating, not just middle-class families and senior citizens who have been hit the hardest in the recession. everything has happened in the last decade. they have been hit the hardest on, carried the brunt of it. now we're saying, you know what? everybody ought to be in this as americans. we all benefit from this great country, the blessings of this country, and everybody ought to be a part of the solution. i believe it was a very strong message. i believe it was a very strong message to say that people want us to work together. but i also know in looking at the proposal that the s
, despite the fear, it's not going to change one election here in the senate. it's not going to decide one of the primaries that i fear are distorting the politics of our country. but you know what, mr. president? it will decide whether some people live or die in another country, where there is no accountability and only united states values and standards are the difference to the prospects of someone with a disability. in some countries, children are disposed of, killed because they have a disability. our treaty can actually help prevent that. in some countries, children do not get to go to school and certainly have no prospects of a future simply because they are born with a disability. this treaty will help offer hope where there is none. the united states could actually sit at the table and make the difference for people with disabilities because we're willing to push our values and hold other nations accountable to meet our standards, the gold standard of the americans with disabilities act. mr. president, i'd ask just for another three minutes, please. the presiding officer: without
that president was in cambodia right after the election. he was in burma. secretary clinton moved widely throughout the region as does secretary panetta. and the amount of activities that i do and my forces do have been a prompt jump in what we've done in the past, and we're looking for opportunities to do more exercise. we're doing more of those things already. i think it's visible to our allies. i think it's visible to our partners. not to be invisible to the region. we also want to jump, where's the next summary our aircraft carrier, that's always the sake of. and we will, over time as you heard secretary panetta said, we will rebalance our navy towards the pacific, and i party mentioned in my opening remarks, we are rapidly moving our most capable assets in the region because of some of the ballistic missile defense will be facing of those types of things. so i think it's not about one thing. it's about a holistic approach, and what if you on the military side is only one aspect of a. it's got to be tied to what's happening in the economic side in what's happening in the diplomatic s
is stay involved, stay informed and to make sure those elected into public office understand. [applause] >> have you perceive any difference in the way he's being treated -- [inaudible] >> i have not. i think bradley is treated professionally. the military court-martial is in my opinion the best courtroom to go into, both state and federal. i know anyone who doesn't have experience with the military system may view it with suspicious eyes. but from my days, it is by far the best courtroom for bradley to be in. >> had your experiences in the military and civilian life form how you approach court-martials generally? and this case specifically. >> that is what i was just saying. a lot of people would look at the military and say, this seems to be very important. you have an office there and enlisted taipan i'll come if you go with the panel selected by the person whose been court-martialed. you have a military judge that is in the military and there's some suspicion that person may be subject to some influence. so when you look at it from the outside, you can see and perhaps think the syst
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6